[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Re: Oliver Sacks/Romantic Science



I am having a lot of difficulty of relating the recent discussion to the
work of either ARL or Oliver.
mike

On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 3:41 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com> wrote:

> I wasn't really critiquing the two-by-two matrix: actually, I think that
> such matrices are in fact composed of clines, although we tend not to use
> them that way. After thirty years of teaching, I find that I have myself
> have become an example person, and it's almost impossible for me to grasp
> "Romantic Science" as a concept or even as a diagramme without examples;
> being a linguist, the examples that come naturally to me are languages.
>
> There is a problem with my example that won't fit in the matrix, though.
> Let us consider a language as a bounded historical entity (Neanderthal, or
> we can use English, but it will help if we take a point of view very far in
> the future, when English has become a dead language, preferably through the
> wholesale extinction of our species, because otherwise we can say, as some
> linguists do say, that no language ever really dies--it just changes into
> another language). The language system as a whole is essentially the same
> as the set of all utterances ever made or written in that language. Because
> the language is dead, no other utterances are possible--nobody will say
> them, and nobody can relate them to any context. In this situation, the
> cline of instantiation and the cline of abstraction (which is really the
> cline of potential versus real) must join, and that means that lines that
> were supposedly perpendicular turn out to be parallel.
>
> I found the paper on nuance extremely puzzling, precisely because of the
> lack of examples, so I read it as an attack on conversation analysis. Then
> it made perfect sense. But I found the references to "making love" in the
> description of peasant marriages rather curious, given the title of the
> paper. So now the word "fuck" is used in academic discourse, to talk about
> French peasants making love....it kind of leaves skidmarks on brain,
> somehow.
>
> I once met a doctor in Sudan studying diarrhea. In the course of the
> evening,he managed to make his study, and even its subject matter, truly
> fascinating; we could hardly wait till morning to see if we could find
> samples of some of the things he was talking about. Similarly, one of the
> first linguistics papers I ever read, by my old professor James McCawley at
> University of Chicago, was all about why you can say "fan-fucking-tastic"
> and but you cannot say "fantas-fucking-tic"; I remember the paper well, and
> later I used it to analyze a song from "My Fair Lady"
> ("Abso-blooming-lutely still" in "Wouldn't it lov-er-ly?").
>
> I'm not arguing that we can or even should abolish the euphemism
> treadmills; we can't. Paul recently sent around a call for papers for
> something called "The Journal of Negro Education", and I did a double take
> until I realized it was the journal of W.E.B. Dubois. This summer, I
> learned that in South Africa "black" is perjorative, and "colored" is used
> self-descriptively; in America (I think) it's the other way around. But a
> sociologist should probably be aware that the word "fuck" has actually NOT
> lost all semantic content: if it had it would not be the staple of
> rape-friendly discourses like pop music and hip-hop. Or is that just
> nuance?
>
> David Kellogg
>
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 5:26 AM, Rafi Santo <rsanto@indiana.edu> wrote:
>
> > Pardon the tangent, but I couldn't help but posting this recent paper
> that
> > was presented last month at the ASA:
> > http://kieranhealy.org/files/papers/fuck-nuance.pdf
> >
> > Aside from having a catchy title, it's pretty relevant to this
> discussion.
> >
> > On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 12:09 PM, Lplarry <lpscholar2@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I hope I am not going off on a tangent. The concept "morphic"  and the
> > > notion that  the four approach's are equally valid but express
> different
> > > aspects of THE RELATION.
> > > The notion of difference/relation as a unity and each difference is
> > > equally valid but expressing a different "character" within the
> relation
> > > (as a unity)
> > > Not abstracted or reduced aspects but "morphic" aspects?.
> > > If this is too idio just ignore my question. It is coming from left
> > field.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: "Andy Blunden" <ablunden@mira.net>
> > > Sent: ‎2015-‎09-‎02 8:10 AM
> > > To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
> > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Oliver Sacks/Romantic Science
> > >
> > > So this is a diagnostic tool, Peg?
> > > Could you spell this out a little more for someone who still
> > > doesn't grasp what you are talking about? :)
> > > andy
> > > intrigued.
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > *Andy Blunden*
> > > http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
> > > On 3/09/2015 12:52 AM, Peg Griffin wrote:
> > > > What I did not make clear is that the JoHari window is not really the
> > > same as a matrix.  It is a different kind of tool than I think David
> and
> > > Peter are thinking about.
> > > > Here's the trick: You change the pane sizes to emphasize the one of
> the
> > > four panes you are currently acting on -- but all four panes are always
> > > there.
> > > > So you can make the "concrete specific" pane HUGE by moving the top
> > > bottom inner divider far to the right and moving the left right inner
> > > divider far to the bottom.   Or you can move only one of the  dividers.
> > > And you can move the dividers without such extremes.
> > > >
> > > > Even if a diagnosis/treatment only does the first move I described,
> > > there's little abstract involved.  I don't mind that so much if the
> > actors
> > > are involved in an emergency triage activity, but without the abstract
> > you
> > > are going on observables very influenced by perceptual and cultural
> > access
> > > of the actors and you might not even have the most useful template from
> > the
> > > general to guide/evaluate your trials and errors.  So you'd better
> shift
> > > the panes pretty soon before things get way off base.
> > > >
> > > > You can also fool around with the arrangement of the terms that name
> > the
> > > panes:  Do you get more out of concrete vs. specific or more out of
> > > specific vs. concrete (in David's terms the anchors for the cline).
> Same
> > > for abstract vs. concrete or concrete vs. abstract.
> > > > PG
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: xmca-l-bounces+peg.griffin=att.net@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:
> > > xmca-l-bounces+peg.griffin=att.net@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of Peg
> > > Griffin
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2015 2:55 PM
> > > > To: 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity'
> > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Oliver Sacks/Romantic Science
> > > >
> > > > As far as I understand those terms (nomothetic and idiographic), the
> > > combined motor method does unite them and so arrives at dual
> stimulation,
> > > given the non-accidental mosaic.
> > > > But I don't know that my understanding goes far enough or too far!
> > > > Peg
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: xmca-l-bounces+peg.griffin=att.net@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:
> > > xmca-l-bounces+peg.griffin=att.net@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike
> > > cole
> > > > Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2015 2:08 PM
> > > > To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > > > Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Oliver Sacks/Romantic Science
> > > >
> > > > Is that simultaneously uniting the nomothetic and idiographic, Peg?
> > That
> > > is the way Luria talked about it.
> > > > mike
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 10:52 AM, Peg Griffin <Peg.Griffin@att.net>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Just in a short-hand:
> > > >>
> > > >> Concrete Specific:  Zasetsky (The man with the shattered world)
> > > >>
> > > >> Concrete General: People with traumatic brain injury during WWII
> > > >>
> > > >> Abstract General: Brain is a mosaic of specific domains with actions
> > > >> that interact in dual stimulations (not pure will)
> > > >>
> > > >> Abstract Specific:  A man acts to recall using images; it fails on a
> > > >> certain target.  The man starts appears to abandon the recall by
> > > >> acting an intimately related system – e.g., reciting the alphabet.
> > > >> But the recital is “interrupted” when it bumps into the original
> > > >> recall target and the recall is successful.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> For diagnosis and/or treatment, we must rise to the concrete
> specific.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Sorry I don’t have time to develop this further but I am sure many
> on
> > > >> this list do, and I know that Luria and Sacks did so in wondrous and
> > > >> glorious instances.
> > > >>
> > > >> Peg
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> From: Andy Blunden [mailto:ablunden@mira.net]
> > > >> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2015 11:21 AM
> > > >> To: Peg Griffin; 'eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity'
> > > >> Subject: Re: [Xmca-l] Re: Oliver Sacks/Romantic Science
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> Could you give an example, Peg?
> > > >> andy
> > > >>
> > > >>    _____
> > > >>
> > > >> *Andy Blunden*
> > > >> http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
> > > >>
> > > >> On 2/09/2015 1:14 AM, Peg Griffin wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> What has always helped me – and helps me appreciate Luria and Sachs
> –
> > > >> with rising to the concrete is this funny little square I made
> (based
> > > >> on the even funnier JoHari window after Joseph Luft and Harrington
> > > >> Ingham, I heard). I can think better by working to fill in each of
> the
> > > four cells in
> > > >> the square about an issue of interest.   It helps me think about
> > > >> genetically primary examples in mathematics curricula, too.
> > > >>    Concrete       Abstract
> > > >> Specific
> > > >> General
> > > >>
> > > >> A romantic square,
> > > >> Peg
> > > >>
> > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > >> From: xmca-l-bounces+peg.griffin=att.net@mailman.ucsd.edu [mailto:
> > > >> xmca-l-bounces+peg.griffin=att.net@mailman.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of
> Rod
> > > >> Parker-Rees
> > > >> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2015 4:55 AM
> > > >> To: ablunden@mira.net; eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Oliver Sacks/Romantic Science
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks for posting this, Andy.
> > > >>
> > > >> I found Luria's account fascinating, particularly because of his
> > > >> reference to 'the beauty of the art of science' and his observation
> > > >> that 'The eye of science does not probe “a thing,” an event isolated
> > > >> from other things or events. Its real object is to see and
> understand
> > > >> the way a thing or event relates to other things or events'.
> > > >>
> > > >> We are able to communicate because we are able to agree (more or
> less)
> > > >> on ways of organising experience into shareable categories but our
> > > >> communication ranges across a whole spectrum of ways of using these
> > > >> categories. Luria refers to classical and romantic branches of
> science
> > > >> but he also acknowledges the differences between 'poetic' use of
> > > >> language and more routine, formulaic forms of communication. The
> > > >> romantic focus on an 'individual' can only ever be conducted in the
> > > >> medium of a very un-individual language and no person's life could
> > > >> possibly be understood without reference to relationships with other
> > > >> persons which then spread roots and branches out to a forest of
> > > connections, causes and consequences.
> > > >>
> > > >> David wrote of the impossibility of 'rising' to the level of theory
> if
> > > >> one were to immerse oneself in the study of an individual case and
> > > >> Luria cites Marx's description of science as 'ascending to the
> > > >> concrete'. As Luria goes on to conclude 'People come and go, but the
> > > >> creative sources of great historical events and the important ideas
> > > >> and deeds remain' so, in this sense, what matters is the
> contribution
> > > >> individuals make to something bigger and more enduring than
> themselves
> > > >> but Luria also writes that 'Romantics in science want neither to
> split
> > > >> living reality into its elementary components nor to represent the
> > > >> wealth of life's concrete events in abstract models that lose the
> > > properties of the phenomena themselves'.
> > > >>
> > > >> I think Luria's account of Sherashevsky's mental experience is
> > > >> particularly interesting because it may reveal something about how
> all
> > > >> minds work, albeit that Sherashevsky's 'limen' may have been 'set'
> > > >> lower than most people's, allowing him to notice the sensory
> > > >> associations which words bring with them in a way which, for most of
> > > >> us, may occur only at a pre-conscious level. This provides a
> > > >> particularly powerful reminder of the inescapable fact that every
> > > >> person's use of a shared language (whether of words, gestures,
> > > >> behaviours or any other units of meaning) is just the surface of a
> > > >> pool of connections and associations which can never be shared with
> or
> > > >> known by anyone else. However romantic our focus may be, we can only
> > > >> go so far in understanding another person's understanding and much
> > > >> less far in communicating that to other people (knowing someone is a
> > > >> very different thing from being able to share that knowledge in a
> > > >> rich and meaningful way). And of course, on the other side of the
> > > >> spectrum, classical scientists who pretend that their knowledge is
> > > >> entirely pure and untainted by the personal associations that swirl
> > > beneath the limens of their knowing are just inventing stories!
> > > >>
> > > >> I apologise for rambling but I am particularly interested in what
> lies
> > > >> beneath the concrete because of my focus on how very young children
> > > >> are able to make sense of a world which, for adults, is so
> powerfully
> > > >> dominated by abstractions.
> > > >>
> > > >> All the best,
> > > >>
> > > >> Rod
> > > >>
> > > >> -----Original Message-----
> > > >> From: xmca-l-bounces+rod.parker-rees=
> plymouth.ac.uk@mailman.ucsd.edu
> > > >> [mailto:xmca-l-bounces+rod.parker-rees=
> > plymouth.ac.uk@mailman.ucsd.edu
> > > >> ]
> > > >> On Behalf Of Andy Blunden
> > > >> Sent: 01 September 2015 05:17
> > > >> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
> > > >> Subject: [Xmca-l] Re: Oliver Sacks/Romantic Science
> > > >>
> > > >> Try this, in Word this time.
> > > >> Andy
> > > >> ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> *Andy Blunden*
> > > >> http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
> > > >> On 1/09/2015 1:32 PM, mike cole wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> ​It might be helpful to this discussion if someone would post the
> > > >> chapter on Romantic Science from Luria's autobiography which MUST be
> > > >> somewhere public in pdf. It appears that I do not have one.
> > > >>
> > > >> After reading what the person said, then discussion of the ideas
> seems
> > > >> appropriate. Ditto Sacks, who has written a couple of extended
> essay's
> > > >> on his view of Romantic Science.
> > > >>
> > > >> It is true that the Russian psychologists, erudite as they were,
> were
> > > >> not sociologists. Nor were they anthropologists. The nature of their
> > > >> enterprise encompassed those fields and more.
> > > >>
> > > >> Doing Romantic Science and immersing oneself in the individual case
> in
> > > >> no way excludes inclusion of sociology, anthropology, in their work.
> > > >> Nor does Luria argue so.
> > > >>
> > > >> mike
> > > >> ​
> > > >>
> > > >> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 7:29 PM, David Kellogg <
> dkellogg60@gmail.com
> > > >> <mailto:dkellogg60@gmail.com> <mailto:dkellogg60@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>      I think the problem with this view of romantic science
> > > >>      is that it
> > > >>      completely precludes building a psychology on a
> > > >>      sociology. In that sense
> > > >>      (and in others), Vygotsky wasn't a romantic scientist
> > > >>      at all. Vygotsky
> > > >>      certainly did not believe in "total immersion in the
> > > >>      individual case"; such
> > > >>      an immersion is a refusal to rise to the level of
> > > >>      theory. I'm not sure
> > > >>      Luria was romantic that way either: "the Man with a
> > > >>      Shattered Mind" and
> > > >>      "The Memory of Mnemonist" are really exceptions.
> > > >>      Remember the main
> > > >>      criticism of Luria's book "The Nature of Human
> > > >>      Conflicts" was always that
> > > >>      it was too quantitative.
> > > >>
> > > >>      There are, of course, some areas of psychology that
> > > >>      are well studied as
> > > >>      case histories. Recently, I've been looking into
> > > >>      suicidology, and in
> > > >>      particular the work of Edwin Shneidman, who pioneered
> > > >>      the linguistic
> > > >>      analysis of suicide notes (and who appears to have
> > > >>      been influenced, as
> > > >>      early as the 1970s, by Kasanin and by Vygotsky's work
> > > >>      on schizophrinia).
> > > >>      Now you would think that if ever there was a field
> > > >>      that would benefit from
> > > >>      total immersion in the individual case, this is one.
> > > >>      But Shneidman says
> > > >>      that suicide notes are mostly full of trite, banal
> > > >>      phrases, and as a
> > > >>      consequence very easy to code--and treat quantiatively
> > > >>      (one of his first
> > > >>      studies was simply to sort a pile of real and
> > > >>      imitation suicide notes and
> > > >>      carefully note the criteria he had when he made
> > > >>      correct judgements). And of
> > > >>      course the whole point of Durkheim's work on suicide
> > > >>      is that the individual
> > > >>      case can be utterly disregarded, since the great
> > > >>      variations are
> > > >>      sociological and the psychological variables all seem
> > > >>      trivial, transient,
> > > >>      or mutually cancelling when we look at suicide at a
> > > >>      large scale (as we must
> > > >>      these days). Shneidman says he has never read a
> > > >>      suicide note he would want
> > > >>      to have written.
> > > >>
> > > >>      David Kellogg
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >>      On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Andy Blunden
> > > >>      <ablunden@mira.net  <mailto:ablunden@mira.net> <mailto:
> > > >> ablunden@mira.net>> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>      > As little as I understand it, Larry, Oliver Sacks'
> > > >>      style of Romantic
> > > >>      > Science was his complete immersion in the individual
> > > >>      case before him, and
> > > >>      > development of a science of complete persons. The
> > > >>      paradigm of this type of
> > > >>      > science was Luria. A limit case of "Qualitative
> > > >>      Science" I suppose. The
> > > >>      > opposite is the study of just one aspect of each
> > > >>      case, e.g. facial
> > > >>      > recognition, and the attempt to formulate a
> > > >>      "covering law" for just this
> > > >>      > aspect.
> > > >>      > Andy
> > > >>      >
> > > >>      ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >>      > *Andy Blunden*
> > > >>      > http://home.pacific.net.au/~andy/
> > > >>       <http://home.pacific.net.au/%7Eandy/> <
> > > >> http://home.pacific.net.au/%7Eandy/>
> > > >>      > On 1/09/2015 8:40 AM, HENRY SHONERD wrote:
> > > >>      >
> > > >>      >> Mike,
> > > >>      >> I recall in an obituary in the NYTimes that
> > > >>      naysayers were cited in
> > > >>      >> reviewing Oliver Sacks’ life work. I am wondering
> > > >>      if some of that push back
> > > >>      >> was related to his practice of romantic science,
> > > >>      which, if I understand
> > > >>      >> from things Andy has written, involves immersion in
> > > >>      the phenomena of
> > > >>      >> interest in search of a unit of analysis. Goethe,
> > > >>      for example, immersed
> > > >>      >> himself in the phenomena of living things. His
> > > >>      writing prefigures the cell
> > > >>      >> as a unit of analysis, but the technology of
> > > >>      microscopes could not confirm
> > > >>      >> such a unit until later on. Your contrasting Bruner
> > > >>      and Sacks makes me
> > > >>      >> wonder if the subject, not just the object, is at
> > > >>      issue. Different styles
> > > >>      >> of research bring different construals. This may be
> > > >>      the bane of
> > > >>      >> objectivist, empiricist science but does it really
> > > >>      make Sacks less of a
> > > >>      >> researcher and just a lowly clinician?
> > > >>      >> Henry
> > > >>      >>
> > > >>      >>
> > > >>      >>
> > > >>      >>> On Aug 30, 2015, at 7:02 PM, mike cole
> > > >>      <mcole@ucsd.edu  <mailto:mcole@ucsd.edu> <mailto:
> mcole@ucsd.edu
> > >>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>      >>>
> > > >>      >>> Hi Laura-- I knew Oliver primarily through our
> > > >>      connections with Luria and
> > > >>      >>> the fact that we
> > > >>      >>> independently came to embrace the idea of a
> > > >>      romantic science. He was a
> > > >>      >>> shy
> > > >>      >>> and diffident person. You can get that feeling,
> > > >>      and the difference
> > > >>      >>> between
> > > >>      >>> him and Jerry Bruner in this regard in the
> > > >>      interview with them that
> > > >>      >>> someone
> > > >>      >>> pirated on
> > > >>      >>> to youtube.
> > > >>      >>>
> > > >>      >>> Jerry is very old but last heard from by me,
> > > >>      engaging intellectually all
> > > >>      >>> the while.
> > > >>      >>>
> > > >>      >>> mike
> > > >>      >>>
> > > >>      >>> On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 5:18 PM, Laura Martin
> > > >>      <martinl@azscience.org  <mailto:martinl@azscience.org>
> <mailto:
> > > >> martinl@azscience.org>>
> > > >>      >>> wrote:
> > > >>      >>>
> > > >>      >>> Thanks, Mike. A number of years ago I had the
> > > >>      privilege of spending an
> > > >>      >>>> evening with Sacks when Lena Luria was visiting
> > > >>      Jerry Bruner and Carol
> > > >>      >>>> Feldman in NY.  I stood in for Sylvia who
> > > >>      couldn't make the dinner - it
> > > >>      >>>> was
> > > >>      >>>> an extraordinary evening in many ways. Do you
> > > >>      ever hear from Bruner? I
> > > >>      >>>> wonder if he's still active.
> > > >>      >>>>
> > > >>      >>>> Laura
> > > >>      >>>>
> > > >>      >>>>
> > > >>      >>>> Sent from my iPad
> > > >>      >>>>
> > > >>      >>>> On Aug 30, 2015, at 3:29 PM, mike cole
> > > >>      <mcole@ucsd.edu  <mailto:mcole@ucsd.edu> <mailto:
> mcole@ucsd.edu
> > >>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>      >>>>
> > > >>      >>>> Dear Colleagues ---
> > > >>      >>>>
> > > >>      >>>> I am forwarding, with personal sadness, the news
> > > >>      that Oliver Sacks has
> > > >>      >>>> succumbed to cancer.
> > > >>      >>>> Its not a surprise, but a sad passing indeed.
> > > >>      >>>> mike
> > > >>      >>>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > > >>      >>>>
> > > >>      >>>> Date: Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 3:07 PM
> > > >>      >>>> Subject: NYTimes.com: Oliver Sacks Dies at 82;
> > > >>      Neurologist and Author
> > > >>      >>>> Explored the Brain’s Quirks
> > > >>      >>>> To: lchcmike@gmail.com  <mailto:lchcmike@gmail.com>
> > <mailto:
> > > >> lchcmike@gmail.com>
> > > >>      >>>>
> > > >>      >>>>
> > > >>      >>>>   Sent by sashacole510@gmail.com
> > > >>       <mailto:sashacole510@gmail.com> <mailto:
> sashacole510@gmail.com
> > >:
> > > >> Oliver Sacks Dies at
> > > >>      82; Neurologist
> > > >>      >>>> and Author Explored the Brain’s Quirks
> > > >>      >>>> <
> > > >>      >>>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=InCMR7g4BCKC2wiZPkcVUieQKbejxL4
> > > >> a <
> > > >>
> > http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=InCMR7g4BCKC2wiZPkcVUieQKbejxL4
> > > >>
> a&user_id=bd31502e6eb851a9261827fdfbbcdf6d&email_type=eta&task_id=1440
> > > >> 972441657668&regi_id=0>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> &user_id=bd31502e6eb851a9261827fdfbbcdf6d&email_type=eta&task_id=1440972441657668&regi_id=0>
> > > >>      >>>> By
> > > >>      >>>> GREGORY COWLES
> > > >>      >>>>
> > > >>      >>>> Dr. Sacks explored some of the brain’s strangest
> > > >>      pathways in
> > > >>      >>>> best-selling
> > > >>      >>>> case histories like “The Man Who Mistook His Wife
> > > >>      for a Hat,” achieving
> > > >>      >>>> a
> > > >>      >>>> level of renown rare among scientists.
> > > >>      >>>> Or, copy and paste this URL into your browser:
> > > >>      http://nyti.ms/1LL040D
> > > >>      >>>> <
> > > >>      >>>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=InCMR7g4BCKC2wiZPkcVUieQKbejxL4
> > > >> a <
> > > >>
> > http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=InCMR7g4BCKC2wiZPkcVUieQKbejxL4
> > > >>
> a&user_id=bd31502e6eb851a9261827fdfbbcdf6d&email_type=eta&task_id=1440
> > > >> 972441657668&regi_id=0>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> &user_id=bd31502e6eb851a9261827fdfbbcdf6d&email_type=eta&task_id=1440972441657668&regi_id=0>
> > > >>      >>>> To
> > > >>      >>>> get unlimited access to all New York Times
> > > >>      articles, subscribe today.
> > > >>      >>>> See
> > > >>      >>>> Subscription Options.
> > > >>      >>>> <
> > > >>      >>>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=4z5Q7LhI+KVBjmEgFdYACDuqzkg7rwC
> > > >>
> IjbQiYyNWYJIW5drsCg04xD2q1X6bqVB/vYPHy+JP5GfoOOml3K0i6GaUY7fZ7jcK869mP
> > > >> AvEGfk=
> > > >> <
> > > >>
> > http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=4z5Q7LhI+KVBjmEgFdYACDuqzkg7rwC
> > > >>
> IjbQiYyNWYJIW5drsCg04xD2q1X6bqVB/vYPHy+JP5GfoOOml3K0i6GaUY7fZ7jcK869mP
> > > >>
> AvEGfk=&user_id=bd31502e6eb851a9261827fdfbbcdf6d&email_type=eta&task_i
> > > >> d=1440972441657668&regi_id=0>
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> &user_id=bd31502e6eb851a9261827fdfbbcdf6d&email_type=eta&task_id=1440972441657668&regi_id=0>
> > > >>      >>>> To
> > > >>      >>>> ensure delivery to your inbox, please add
> > > >>      nytdirect@nytimes.com  <mailto:nytdirect@nytimes.com> <mailto:
> > > >> nytdirect@nytimes.com>
> > > >>      to your
> > > >>      >>>> address book. Advertisement
> > > >>      >>>>
> > > >>      >>>> <
> > > >>      >>>>
> > > >>      http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_click.html?type=goto <
> > > >>
> > http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_click.html?type=goto&opzn&page=secu
> > > >>
> > re.nytimes.com/mem/emailthis.html&pos=Frame6A&sn2=6da5bd5a/78e3a264&sn
> > > >>
> 1=1071d68d/49278277&camp=FoxSearchlight_AT2015-1977432-August-C&ad=Mis
> > > >>
> tressAmerica_336x90-NOW&goto=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Efandango%2Ecom%2Fmistr
> > > >> essamerica%5F182432%2Fmovieoverview>
> > > >> &opzn&page=
> > > >>
> > >
> >
> secure.nytimes.com/mem/emailthis.html&pos=Frame6A&sn2=6da5bd5a/78e3a264&sn1=1071d68d/49278277&camp=FoxSearchlight_AT2015-1977432-August-C&ad=MistressAmerica_336x90-NOW&goto=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Efandango%2Ecom%2Fmistressamerica%5F182432%2Fmovieoverview
> > > >>      >>>> >
> > > >>      >>>> Copyright 2015
> > > >>      >>>> <
> > > >>      >>>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=4z5Q7LhI+KVBjmEgFdYACMlEhIhWVuP
> > > >> IxganfKahJGpDcKtdpfztygRnz23j1z6nDpx4eAAqQbYRMMl5L56EeQ==
> > > >> <
> > > >>
> > http://p.nytimes.com/email/re?location=4z5Q7LhI+KVBjmEgFdYACMlEhIhWVuP
> > > >>
> IxganfKahJGpDcKtdpfztygRnz23j1z6nDpx4eAAqQbYRMMl5L56EeQ==&user_id=bd31
> > > >>
> 502e6eb851a9261827fdfbbcdf6d&email_type=eta&task_id=1440972441657668&r
> > > >> egi_id=0>
> > > >> &user_id=bd31502e6eb851a9261827fdfbbcd
> > >
> > >
> > > [The entire original message is not included.]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Rafi Santo
> > Project Lead
> > Hive Research Lab
> > hiveresearchlab.org
> > A project of Indiana University and New York University
> >
> > Indiana University - Learning Sciences
> >
>



-- 

It is the dilemma of psychology to deal as a natural science with an
object that creates history. Ernst Boesch